Dumb Political Correctness

Discussion in 'West Mall' started by Mr. Deez, Feb 8, 2012.

  1. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    Two points on that. First, it's on them, not me. I never liked grunge. I liked alternative music, but I leaned on the Jane's Addiction side, not the Nirvana side.

    Second, for the sake of discussion, I'll accept responsibility for grunge. ÀMost grungers listened to Nirvana and Pearl Jam for awhile, and yes, they sometimes reeked of cigarettes and body odor. However, by 22 years old, most turned into adults, took showers, burned their flannel shirts, got jobs, got married, and started families. I'd rather be blamed for a crappy musical genre than a culturally destructive lifestyle.
     
  2. ProdigalHorn

    ProdigalHorn 10,000+ Posts

    It's an intersectionality world we live in. It doesn't matter what YOU did or didn't do. Your group is responsible. On the plus side, it makes figuring people out a lot easier in that we don't have to actually do that anymore...

    I am actually pretty proud of our "group" in this respect - most of the Gen Xers I know are pretty level-headed and reasonable, and aren't out there throwing fits about being ignored - largely because most of us DO have jobs and careers and families to deal with and just don't have time/inclination to get involved in all that stuff.

    I suspect that the left is going to deeply regret ignoring us, because that's what they do when they push the crazy like they have this past two years.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    There is a very strong statistical correlation (and I would argue causation) in the appearance and growth of the nanny state, in the broadest terms, and passage of 19.
    (Puns coincidental)
     
  4. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    I would argue if you have never paid property taxes you are not a full citizen and should not enjoy 1-to-1 voting rights with those who have.
     
  5. iatrogenic

    iatrogenic 2,500+ Posts

    I guess I still don't get it, but it's possible you don't get it, so maybe you could clarify that view.

    You are saying a response to a BLM movement built on a fraudulent narrative and pushed to divide blacks from whites to try to keep blacks voting for Democrats should be viewed in the same light as the Democrats' mushy apology that only addresses the specific problem, a verifiable Jew hating Muslim, indirectly?
     
  6. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    Just leave punk alone alone
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Clean

    Clean 5,000+ Posts

    As the parent of two Gen-Xers and one millennial, I don't see where being part of different generations had any more influence on them than their astrology signs.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. ProdigalHorn

    ProdigalHorn 10,000+ Posts

    No. You're conflating two things, which is easy to do since they pretty well blur together, and I wasn't clear in writing it. One is the BLM itself, its leaders, its organization, its agenda. The other - which I'm talking about - is the statement or slogan "Black Lives Matter." It has nothing to do with any specific instance, such as the Michael Brown incident which has been shown to a fraudulent narrative. It was by many people simply a statement that we can't tolerate black people being shot by the police unnecessarily. You can debate the underlying facts of that, and certainly you can show that the numbers don't match with what's being touted, but the second you do that, you have now (in their mind) excused or minimized the person who (according to their understanding) has been shot without cause. And we all know it's happened - which begs the question why the left keeps jumping on the instances that turn out to be made up or exaggerated. And that's the reason why the phrase is used - because their perception is that by discounting it as "just business as usual," you're saying that it isn't a big deal. So they respond that "Black Lives Matter" - because in their mind, they don't matter to some people.

    So of course, the response is "it's not just black people, other people get shot too. Black lives aren't uniquely special - ALL lives matter." And I would like to think that the VAST majority of people agree with both of these statements. No one in America with any sanity wants innocent people of any color or race or gender or religion gunned down in this country. And yet we got into huge arguments about it.

    The reason: Because if you're going to a funeral for someone who was a great athlete, and you get up to do the eulogy and say "Yes he was great, but there are a lot of people who are great athletes. We should take this time to celebrate ALL of them, not just this one person," we would all get why that's inappropriate. It minimizes the point of the occasion, which is to celebrate a specific person and to grieve with specific people about a specific loss they feel.

    So when someone says "Black Lives Matter" and you respond "No, ALL lives matter," they see that as you minimizing their loss, their suffering, their pain, because you're basically saying "there's no issue here, you need to get over it." Whether that's true or not, it's not productive and it's sure not going to help the debate.

    So now we have a situation where the Democrats have done EXACTLY what they demonized many conservatives for doing. They clearly did it for the purposes of minimizing their own racism within their ranks. And as conservatives, I hope we can see that parallel, and maybe understand more why saying "All Lives Matter" as a response is taken as being dismissive of racism and police brutality that does exist - even if not in the volume that some claim. And maybe we need to ask ourselves a pretty hard question too: is our response an attempt to minimize or ignore the idea that there actually are instances of racism in law enforcement? You don't have to accept the Michael Brown narrative to acknowledge that those things do happen and they're not acceptable.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. mchammer

    mchammer 10,000+ Posts

    A good compromise is whether 18-24 year are claimed by an adult for tax purposes
    As a 50 year old, I can relate as all my bosses have been boomers and the recent new hires have been millennials. What the millennials don’t understand is that it’s not going to get much better when the boomers are out of the workforce and they have to work for Gen X. It will get slightly better, but not by much.
     
  10. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez Beer Prophet

    You're spouting the talking points very well, but it's still nonsense. First, the Left claims that "All Lives Matter" is saying "no big deal," but they're wrong. We don't have to accept their ******** terms of the discussion. Second, the funeral analogy is nonsense. A funeral honors an specific deceased individual, so yes, saying "people die everyday" at an individual's funeral would be pretty callous. The "Black Lives Matter" movement is not being deployed for a specific death (whether justifiable or not) but for a broad agenda. It's not like a funeral.

    The reason the Left doesn't like when people say "all lives matter" is not that it minimizes anybody's pain, because it doesn't minimize it anymore than saying "black lives matter." (After all, a guy like Michael Brown isn't just "another black guy" to his family. He's a unique individual.) They don't like it because it diminishes their broad narrative that blacks are uniquely targeted by police for being shot. They want that narrative presumed and to be beyond debate.
     
  11. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    Happy International Womens Day everyone

    Time to step back and let the women kill the spiders, open the jars, fight the wars, roughneck the platform, mine the coal, unclog the toilets, cut down the timber, and all the other dangerous/****** jobs feminists want no part of.

    [​IMG]
     
  12. ProdigalHorn

    ProdigalHorn 10,000+ Posts

    No disagreement here.

    It's the same concept though - a better example would probably be a benefit for cancer survivors where someone makes the argument that heart disease is just as devastating or something like that. Again, no one would debate that (you would hope), but by making that point, I don't know how you'd interpret it as anything other than detracting from the impact of the event's intent. The point is not to let "The Left" get away with anything. But we're going to have to find a way to get along with the 30-40 percent swing voters out there who don't see this stuff as a left-right debate. Do we use the same language with those people as we do with the AOCs of the world, who we know have political agendas? I don't think we should.

    This an example of what I mentioned above - conflating "BLM" and "The Left" with the guy I know who doesn't see why anyone would object to saying that "Black Lives Matter." Maybe you guys don't see that as much. I live in the Northeast (for the next two weeks, anyway) and I see this a lot. Plenty of people out there will make that observation with absolutely no understanding or concern for the overall BLM movement or being part of a political party. And if you can't make that distinction when talking to people that you disagree with, it just makes the polarization in the country worse.

    When you saw the Dems' "apology," did you call BS? I would hope you did, just like the rest of us did. I think most of us interpreted it as someone recognizing that their person said something stupid or at least unacceptable, but wanted to deflect it or avoid admitting that they actually agreed with her, and so they made a big general statement condemning ALL kinds of speech. We believe that because we see their character and their track record in other actions and statements. But if this happened in a vacuum - if a company I worked for did this - I would say that it's more likely they did it because a bunch of people complained about being left out and they wanted to be inclusive to everyone. Theoretically that's a possibility, but knowing these people as a group, I don't believe that's the case.

    So all i was trying to say is that when someone on your Facebook feed or Twitter feed or work group or whatever makes a comment like that, maybe the first response shouldn't be to make a more generalized statement that they will almost surely interpret as minimizing their issue. There's plenty of people who have genuine reactions to this stuff, and the answer is to try and be as clear as we can about what we're saying, rather than falling back into the stuff we say when we're "owning the libs."
     
  13. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts


     
    • WTF? WTF? x 2
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2019
  14. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    Grunge rocks. It is just punk mixed with rock, noise, and metal. Pretty much post-punk is an early Gen-X genre.
     
  15. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  16. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    The best female soccer players in Australia were defeated by 15 year old boys 7-0.

    [​IMG]
     
  17. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    LOL

    [​IMG]
     
  18. Garmel

    Garmel 5,000+ Posts

    Girl power met the power of reality.
     
  19. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    Rotten Tomatoes deleted 45,000 audience reviews from Captain Marvel

    And guess what?

    It's still Rotten

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  20. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

     
  21. Sangre Naranjada

    Sangre Naranjada 10,000+ Posts

    Only 16 counts? Too bad.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  22. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    The issue now becomes, will he actually do any time?
    I doubt it, but sometimes it's good to be wrong
     
  23. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

     
    • poop poop x 3
  24. mb227

    mb227 de Plorable

    Not at all uncommon to be blocked by him...he is one of those that uses the block lists, so if you dared to follow the 'wrong' person or dared not to engage in group think, you get mass-blocked. It's almost a badge of honor LOL!
     
  25. Garmel

    Garmel 5,000+ Posts

    It's as if they know the less informed you are the more likely you are to vote democrat.
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2019
  26. Sangre Naranjada

    Sangre Naranjada 10,000+ Posts

    No kidding. They want voters who can be easily mesmerized by the never ending flow of pro-democrat crapola spewed nightly on TV and social media.
     
  27. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

  28. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    So Dems want 16yos And illegals to have the right
    What could go wrong?
    For our country
     
    • poop poop x 1
  29. Sangre Naranjada

    Sangre Naranjada 10,000+ Posts

    The Dems could win more elections for starters.
     
  30. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    SN
    I forgot the sarc tag.
     

Share This Page